It’s been a while…

It’s amazing how work often seems to get in the way of fun–including the fun of blogging. Of course, it doesn’t seem to slow down some blogs.

Now, while I haven’t been able to keep up with Randi Rhodes–even though I have succumbed, and added her podcast to my subscriptions–I still try to make time to go through the blog from the left–the lobby.

I do like their new look. I think it’s quite stylish. I do think though that the post about Alito, and then the post about New Orleans, go a bit beyond the pale. It’s alright to disagree with the decisions, but the vitriol–well, it’s a bit much.

For instance, Let (the main blogger) writes “Alito is a walking constitutional amendment and we all know it. We might as well have put the Religious Right and the head of every corporation up on that court.” Interesting, except David Broder, in his commentary last week, essentially argued that the problem with Alito is not his willingness to rewrite the constitution, but his rather literalist reading of it. In fact, it is the “left” justices that have most often been cited as “writing” law rather than interpreting it. Remember the “right to privacy”? Which amendment is that one? Hmmm?

And let’s tackle the New Orleans blog entry. “Anyone remember Dubya saying this? ‘”“I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.’ Prior to Hurricane Katrina hitting New Orleans, Homeland Security reportedly knew what was to come, despite claims to the contrary and now there are documents to prove it.” (check out the link to the MSNBC site–go to “the lobby” to get the link–and read this blog. Seriously, it is worth it!) I have to agree that the President’s statement that no one anticipated it was perhaps hyperbole. But I suspect it was more likely a combination of a failure to brief the President by his staff, and an overwhelming sense of so many that it would never really happen.

I have family from New Orleans, so I as much as anyone know the feelings leading up to the hurricane. My family, being conservative, always expects the worst. However, I have been told that often the sense of the population has been one of complacency. It’s not hard to believe that, if the general population didn’t think it could really happen, that perhaps that view was shared by the local leadership in Louisiana. Just perhaps…

The Lobby(ists) go on to write “Not only that, but anyone tracking the story has probably read that the Dept of Homeland Security went through an exercise where a mock Hurricane Pam created all types of catastrophic damage. The results of the exercise were eerily similar to the reality Katrina left in Louisiana, Missourri, and Mississippi and this was way back in 2004.” Interesting. Should we spend billions of dollars after the DHS or DOD have a “doomsday scenario” exercise? I believe they have also done these for earthquakes, terror attacks, and various other natural and man-made catastrophes. What if the decision had been made to spend the money on the levies but we had actually lost San Francisco to another earthquake–would they have applauded our willingness to be prepared–or continued to attack, this time criticizing the inability to “get it right?”

So what is my point? What is the “golden thread of knowledge” to all this? Let’s be critical of the right things. Let’s get the stories “right” before we attack from the left.


3 thoughts on “It’s been a while…

  1. As much as your opinion is appreciated, it is just that – opinion. Bottom line, writing style does not mitigate substance. You may disagree with how I phrase something as much as I disagree with how you seem to present only part of the facts on your blog. At the end of the day, the articles back up the claims and that’s the whole point of commenting on them.

    You may sign up for my blog 102 class next semester, Prof.

    Good day.

  2. I appreciate your taking the time to post a comment. I of course, do understand the importance of providing the citations/sources. Hence, both my pointing to your blog, and recommending that the gentle reader also go to your blog, to perhaps, follow your threads to the articles.

    Heck, I thought it was a good way to get your thoughts to more readers–they have to go to you, to find the articles.

    Now, as for providing opinions versus facts–just which were the opinions, and which were the facts?

    I think you will find I do quite well at separating the two. Your views, are opinions, and mine… well, are also opinions. Of course, as the recent study points out, those with strong opinions are quite adept at filtering facts that create what is known as “cognitive dissonance.” And while I appreciate that we all would like to think we can remain objective–I honestly believe neither you nor I can.

    Here’s one case in point. You consider yourself a moderate, and me a far right conservative. I of course, see myself as a moderate conservative, and see you as amore leftist radical. Both, of course, are opinions. And perhaps both views could easily be supported. Perhaps the only real difference between us is the flavor of our Kool Aid.

    Perhaps the one thing that mitigates against either of us being a moderate is that we actually have opinions, and speak out about them. Moderates, almost definitionally, are rather… umm… mealy mouthed.

    And yes, that is also my “opinion.”

  3. Opinion vs. Fact:

    I went and read the Lobby’s post on Alito and I have to point out that the Professor is the one offering facts while the Lobby only offers opinion and apparently uninformed opinion at that.

    The concern with Alito (and Roberts) is that they are so firmly literalist that they will not acknowledge the growth and change that has occurred with interpreting the Constitution. It is the liberal organizations that for the last 30 years have been using court appointments instead of amendments to achieve changes to the Constitution. The fact is that the Constitution only provides for amendments as the way to alter the Constitution.

    Disliking Alito and saying “we might as well have put the Religious Right and the head of every corporation up on that court” is nothing more than opinion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *